I was concerned about the long term implications of the Richards contract when we signed him, but that time is not now.

1. Richards was never a great skater, and he doesn't have to be.

2. As I can't say enough, The power play and Richards are synonymous. As the PP gets better, so will Richards.

3. He hasn't been shooting enough. This is, I think a product pf playing with Nash and Gaborik. Put Stepan between those two, he'll stay higher and tend to the defensive responsibilities. Put Richards with Callahan and Kreider/Hagelin, and give him a more free offensive reign. I know you guys have noticed Richards getting too deep with Nash and Gaborik, only for the puck to leave the zone for a 3 or 4 on 2 the other way.

4. Yes, his decision making has been poor. I can't argue with that. But age doesn't make you go senile at 32. I think that will come with time.

Look, I hope you are right. IF he is going to stick around he needs to be better.

He played well with Callahan last year. And he worked well with Hagelin, too, exploiting his speed. Those two can work down low and create space for Richards.

Gaborik played his best hockey last year with Stepan. Stepan and Gaborik need a guy who can work the boards as well. You are right about Stepan and Richards needing to be the high man. Pyatt can work the boards down low and create space for Gaborik and Stepan.

Keep Miller and Kreider together, they feed well off eachother. Give them Nash to open space for them.

And now you have a 4th line that can shut down another team's top unit.

Tortorella is also at fault here for having no effin clue how to adapt during a game.

Postma isn't going to be available. He's a young offensive d-man with top four upside playing in his first NHL season. Winnipeg would only trade him if they were packaging him for an upgrade elsewhere (like if they did something like Little + Postma + 2nd for a legit 1st liner). There's virtually no incentive for them to move their D prospect who is playing in his first NHL season for a different prospect.

So, theoretically (not actually saying we should do this), it would mean like, maybe holding onto Nash (only because he has term left on his deal and is young enough to have a lot in the tank still) and doing things like moving Gaborik and Richards in packages with picks and prospects to add players like Vermette, Hanzal, Little, Korpikoski, Ladd, Kane, Wheeler, Burmistrov, Postma, Gormley, Klesla (I just used players from WPG and PHX as examples, could be any similar players) and the idea would be to add 4-5 of those players at the cost of Richards, Gaborik a couple of picks, prospects and maybe a Pyatt or Eminger in the mix somewhere. Basically, having several lower tier talents but really spreading it out.

I mean, bleh, whatever. I have no idea what it would end up looking like and I'm not being serious or suggesting we SHOULD do this by any stretch of the imagination. I'm simply saying if I were in an alternate reality and we were going to do things differently, I'd be interested in going with a deeper, less "elite" look than having a stacked top 3 worth 22M. Hopefully, Miller and Kreider and Hagelin and Stepan can step it up/keep it up and give us some of that deeper look. Don't take this post too seriously. It's not a trade proposal. It's just a "what if..." kind of rant.

The one thing that the B's really have going for them is that they're mainly comprised of guys who have come up through that system. I've always maintained that if you nurture and develop prospects correctly, they'll repay you by playing their ***** off for you as long as you have them.

We've seen that internally, the problem is that we're drafting guys who will fill roles, and writing big checks in July to bring in the big talent.

The one thing that the B's really have going for them is that they're mainly comprised of guys who have come up through that system. I've always maintained that if you nurture and develop prospects correctly, they'll repay you by playing their ***** off for you as long as you have them.

We've seen that internally, the problem is that we're drafting guys who will fill roles, and writing big checks in July to bring in the big talent.

And those big talent guys always take time to adjust, and vice versa with his teammates. In a short season this could not be playing out much worse. This has been our training camp except there is too much 'on the job' training.

And those big talent guys always take time to adjust, and vice versa with his teammates. In a short season this could not be playing out much worse. This has been our training camp except there is too much 'on the job' training.

If they ever adjust at all. We're always big players for big talent, but how many of those guys have really come to NY and flourished? Can probably count them on one hand.

Postma isn't going to be available. He's a young offensive d-man with top four upside playing in his first NHL season. Winnipeg would only trade him if they were packaging him for an upgrade elsewhere (like if they did something like Little + Postma + 2nd for a legit 1st liner). There's virtually no incentive for them to move their D prospect who is playing in his first NHL season for a different prospect.

I agree PP is that good which is why I suggested him.
Gotta give to get.
? is how much. Any way we can cut that price by trying just for him and adding.

Maybe Ceresnak and draft pick and ___________
they want scoring? maybe St. Croix?

I agree PP is that good which is why I suggested him.
Gotta give to get.
? is how much. Any way we can cut that price by trying just for him and adding.

Maybe Ceresnak and draft pick and ___________
they want scoring? maybe St. Croix?

Winnipeg needs young Dmen who can play. Up and coming RH Dmen are pretty valuable. Your offer is low. Very low. When multi teams are bidding the value rises above 'face value'. This is sports trading 101

Don't take this post too seriously. It's not a trade proposal. It's just a "what if..." kind of rant.

no offense, but your "what if" looks like Nash rejoining the NY blue jackets. Korpikoski on the 2line?
Vermette as a#1?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluenote13

Good try MPF, but then you'd be asking this NYR regime to be smart on prospects, sensible on the FA market and restraining themselves from acquiring their former picks/players who are washed up.

The rangers have been very good in FA. What former wash up players have we been acquiring since the 05 lockout?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trxjw

The one thing that the B's really have going for them is that they're mainly comprised of guys who have come up through that system. I've always maintained that if you nurture and develop prospects correctly, they'll repay you by playing their ***** off for you as long as you have them.

We've seen that internally, the problem is that we're drafting guys who will fill roles, and writing big checks in July to bring in the big talent.

Yeah I wasn't gonna say it, but what if they never figure it out like so many FA busts we've had to endure here!?

Again, it would be nice if like so many teams our younger prospects could be behind these 'stars' contributing to make up for what the big boys can't do on the regular.

Like you said about the Bruins, seems like strong teams keep coming up with guys that can play, not just spot fillers.

Yeah, exactly. What always blows my mind is that doesn't it make more sense from a business standpoint to see if a guy can play in NY while he's on a cheap UFA deal, or better yet, an entry-level deal, instead of spending $6MM+ per year for the rights to experiment? They always say that you can't rebuild in NY, but honestly, after the dark ages, can anyone really say that the fans won't flock to this team year after year?

Honestly, when was the last time an NHL team won a cup with a team that was anchored by hired guns? I suppose you could argue that the Ducks had Pronger, Selanne and the Niedermeyer brothers, but they also had a group of youngsters who carried the load offensively in the playoffs.

Boston hit the jackpot with the '06 draft, but they also were able to scuttle Kessel for a huge return when he was still manageable financially. Teams want young talent, even if they aren't cut out for your team in particular. What they don't want are guys who signed huge deals and are on the wrong side of 30.

Winnipeg needs young Dmen who can play. Up and coming RH Dmen are pretty valuable. Your offer is low. Very low. When multi teams are bidding the value rises above 'face value'. This is sports trading 101

They're not gonna trade postma for a guy who isn't ready to play either.

We won't always be writing big checks in July, but if it's for young proven talent, what's the difference?

Seems like all it takes is a little adversity and everyone questions the long term goal. If it doesn't work out this year.. so what? We're still set to be a competitive team next year and beyond.

sheesh.

I've been saying this same stuff for years now. Has very little to do with the current team.

McDonagh was a winning lottery ticket. The kid wasn't living up to expectations, and Montreal thought he was expendable. Most teams don't make that kind of mistake.

There's a big difference between having viable, proven youngsters in your lineup to compliment your stars, and watching those kids try and stick and make an impact while your stars scratch prime years off of their hockey career. Timing is everything.

We've had the same problems year after year with this team. Lack of identity. Lack of chemistry. Lack of talent. Lack of grit. Lack of heart. We've never been able to put them all together in one year. How much longer can we continue to say: "So what? There's always next year. Look who will be on the UFA market!"

I could really hurt you and go even further by saying that by bringing in the FA's every year we keep ourselves away from ever getting those high end picks that end up difference makers. Then when we do have a chance to draft something like that we manage to fall in love with a role player

I've been saying this same stuff for years now. Has very little to do with the current team.

McDonagh was a winning lottery ticket. The kid wasn't living up to expectations, and Montreal thought he was expendable. Most teams don't make that kind of mistake.

There's a big difference between having viable, proven youngsters in your lineup to compliment your stars, and watching those kids try and stick and make an impact while your stars scratch prime years off of their hockey career. Timing is everything.

We've had the same problems year after year with this team. Lack of identity. Lack of chemistry. Lack of talent. Lack of grit. Lack of heart. We've never been able to put them all together in one year. How much longer can we continue to say: "So what? There's always next year. Look who will be on the UFA market!"

after Torts arrival, and that of Brad Richards leading us to the ECF you don't think we're making any progress? We have no identity? Scoring goals in front of our All world goalie has been the major problem this team has faced in recent years. We've made moves to address it by acquiring the talent of Nash. We could stand to add another scorer!

a shortened season with no camp or preseason has presented problems, but I don't think it means we've regressed into the dark ages of the past. You're absolutely right that we have to get the timing down. I think we're in good shape for the years to come.

I think Richie is gonna have to go with the amnesty buy out. It just doesn't make sense to keep him for 7 more seasons. You can make an argument that he's not worth, or barely worth, his cap hit right now. What is he going to look like 2,3,4 years from now? Not better, that's for sure. Which is all the more reason for this team to pull their heads out of the crevices they've stuck them in and start playing to their potential. The window is open.

You guys are giving up on Richards too soon. He was a huge part of our success in the second half last season. I don't see how 8 months can completely change a player's production. I am just as frustrated with his play, or rather stupid passes, but he will get better and turn it around.

You guys are giving up on Richards too soon. He was a huge part of our success in the second half last season. I don't see how 8 months can completely change a player's production. I am just as frustrated with his play, or rather stupid passes, but he will get better and turn it around.

Okay, and what is he going to look like 3 seasons from now when there's still 4 years on his deal at 6.6M? We're given an amnesty buyout. It doesn't make sense to use it on anyone but Richards.

You guys are giving up on Richards too soon. He was a huge part of our success in the second half last season. I don't see how 8 months can completely change a player's production. I am just as frustrated with his play, or rather stupid passes, but he will get better and turn it around.

I'm not giving up on him. I'm excited about what he can provide for this team the next two seasons. Similarly, I'm excited about the prospect of getting out of the next 6 years of the contract.